Jump to content

User talk:Renamed user 995577823Xyn

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 69.197.124.239 (talk) at 00:44, 1 June 2012 (→‎Cheri Bustos Picture: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome!

Hello, Renamed user 995577823Xyn, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Acebulf (talk) 03:41, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re:JRC College Building.jpg

Please advise: We have now altered our copyright tag to cc-by-sa-3.0 - is this suitable for our image as it still appears with "candidate for speedy deletion"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnRuskinCollege (talk • contribs) 09:44, 10 November 2011‎ (UTC)[reply]


Message moved from user page

Hi, an official declaration of consent has been sent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org for the image Arambedrosian.jpg. Thank you for all of your help.

Hello, a permission has been sent (on Dec. 2) by the copyright owner to permissions-en@wikimedia.org in connection with the use of the image Thriller_author_A.C._Frieden.jpg. Furthermore, a link to the official website image authorization/permissions page has also been added that states the image's CC-BY-SA-compatible license terms. Thanks for your guidance. A. Catarivas

Life magazine renewals

Since you found an archive of Life magazine copyright renewals for some of the files in question on the CCI, and I subsequently noted that the U.S. copyright office online search page seemed to have missed a number of years, can you comment or check on this? Since you are the prime investigator for the Life images in question, some clarification about this would be helpful. I certainly need to know if I can trust their search page in the future. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The online copyright search at copyright.gov only goes back so far and doesn't take into consideration all copyrights filed since the office began. Only more current copyrights appear in their online search. The best place to start looking for older information about whether an item was renewed is here : Catalog of Copyright Entries. It's organized by year; search the year before as well as the year the renewal was due, as some companies filed before time was up. Their pages are trustworthy for the timeframe they deal with. We hope (talk) 19:58, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks for that. But your link source goes through 1977 only, and the online gov search starts from there, including 1978 and newer. When I noted that I found no Life renewals prior to 1985, I was using the online source. The text source apparently stopped being published in 1978 according to what a librarian told me. Since almost all of the Life images in question would have been renewed between 1978 and 1985, how do we handle that time period?
I'm responding here to keep all questions and responses connected, so I'll check back here. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 21:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Copyright Act of 1976 no longer requires copyright registration. However, there are other ways that can make a magazine issue copyrighted:
  1. Copyright notice (proper): Form of copyright (Copr, Copyright, ©), Proprietor, and Year. Simple.
  2. If copyright notice is malformed or omitted:
    1. Registration before first publication or within five years after first publication
    2. No more than "relatively small copies" omit that notice; many other copies bear notice.
    3. "All rights reserved" or something similar — I think. In other words, omission of notice violates a written agreement that a copyright notice be beared.
So, if you want to inspect copyright of every magazine, use microforms, such as microfilms and microfiches. --George Ho (talk) 15:07, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That information should be at copyright.gov in their database. FAQs for copyright searches. "Failure to find a renewal record here does not necessarily mean that the book is in the public domain." We hope (talk) 21:47, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The quoted sentence above seems to be referring to the rest of the paragraph, which wouldn't relate to hundreds of Life magazines in general during the time period we're trying to focus on:

Failure to find a renewal record here does not necessarily mean that the book is in the public domain. Because of changes in copyright law, books published in 1964 or later, and many books that were originally published outside the US by non-American authors, do not have to register or renew in order to be copyrighted. (See the Library of Congress Website for details.) Also, it's possible for a number of works by a particular author, or published in a particular magazine, to be covered under one blanket copyright that may or may not mention the individual pieces by name. So when researching the copyright for a particular piece, you should know its author and publication history, and use this information in your record searches as well.

Since you are the prime investigator of the CCI, and the handful of images tagged would have been renewed between 1978 and 1985, how do we verify this? --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 22:11, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think you misunderstand what I've been doing with the images. I am not a member of the CCI team-if I find information, I enter it there. Your question needs to be taken up with someone like User:Moonriddengirl. We hope (talk) 22:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Will do. Thanks for trying. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 23:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, if you need any of your recent photo uploads improved a bit, like I did with your Dick Clark addition, let me know. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 02:47, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And I'm going to suggest that in future, you copy the back of a photo as well as an uncropped copy, as in that Dick Clark photo, and then upload the "finished" version of it. Many have press releases and dates on the back. You get the source and timeframe on record like that. We hope (talk) 04:20, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I assume the links which show both sides won't be around forever. BTW, I found the answer to the above question and posted it at File:Eisenstaedt-Monroe-Life-1953.jpg discussion. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 06:24, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is a way to archive web pages. Internet Archive only crawls a very small number of sites when compared to the number of them on the net and some sites don't allow bots at all. With WebCite, you can archive a page and get a link to it; all it takes is a valid e-mail address. The only site I know that keeps their sold items online permanently with front and back displayed is a postcard site, CardCow.
My own "solution" to the PD or non-PD issue has been to consider everything as non-PD unless I can provide proof (link to the copyright renewal pages showing no renewal, date on the item for pre 1923, etc.) that there's no copyright or renewal. We hope (talk) 14:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Your "solution" is the one mandated by our policies; we can't presume that something is PD, but must have evidence to believe so. Wikiwatcher, I'm glad you found the solution to your question. If you have other questions about determining status of images, you might want to try WP:MCQ or Wikisource. They're really very good at sussing out such things and may have good tips for you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:22, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

re Non-free use of File:LITMW publicity.jpg

Hi there We hope. Thanks for you recent message. I really hope this image can remain, but obviously I appreciate the issue. It is/was most definitely a publicity shot − it also appeared on official merchandise such as T-shirts until quite recently, and I notice the pic is still included on the Harrison online store page: http://www.georgeharrison.com/#/store/uk. Anyway, I'll post a comment on image's talk page as instructed, but I just wondered: if I were to upload the image from, say, this Harrison website (rather than scanning a page from a book, as I have done), does that get around the problem? (i.e., is the scanned page the problem?) Many thanks, JG66 (talk) 14:01, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I misunderstood − I'd been focusing on the image page's licensing comment ("To the uploader: This tag should only be used for images of a person, product, or event that is known to have come from a press kit or similar source ..."), so I thought the status of the image as a publicity shot was the problem. Thanks for your suggestions, JG66 (talk) 15:36, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re:http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/79/The_Real_Housewives_of_New_Jersey.jpg

I'm sorry but I do not know exactly what I am supposed to do to the image in order to keep it there? Also, I'd like to keep the publicity license if possible. HousewifeHater 02:10, 30 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Housewifehader (talk • contribs) HousewifeHater 02:14, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"removed extra license"

[1] - but it's promotional screenshot, from the official website release. Is it really not possible for a picture to have 2 licenses? --Niemti (talk) 07:04, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cheri Bustos Picture

Greetings, what do I need to do to get the pic of Cheri Bustos approved? I am volunteering on her campaign. This picture is included in her media kit. Tell me the right code to use, name the hoops I have to jump through, and I'll jump through them. Specifics would be really helpful! Thanks!! 69.197.124.239 (talk)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Renamed_user_995577823Xyn&oldid=495384736"